Mid-Term Evaluation of the Netherlands Food Security Programme in the Palestinian Territories
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Mid-term evaluation of the Netherlands Food Security Programme in the Palestinian Territories FINAL REPORT Netherlands Representative Office Ramallah Ede, June 2015 Draft Report June 20th 2015 ©MDF2016 2 Authors (in alphabetical order): Dr. Saskia Brand (Team leader - MDF HQ, Ede, Netherlands) Peter Laban (Independent consultant, Ramallah) Naser Qadous (Independent consultant, Ramallah) Dr. Ahmad Abu Schaban (Independent consultant, Gaza) The purpose of this mid-term evaluation is to formulate a reasoned opinion on the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of the funded projects with respect to the context, policy and procedures of NRO intervention. The consultant has examined the outcomes of the project in the light of the objectives fixed. He/she has also reviewed the execution and functioning of the project in its different phases of implementation and monitoring. This evaluation has been financed by the NRO. The observations, assessments and recommendations expressed in this report are the sole responsibility of the authors. NRO Mid Term Review Food Security Programme Draft Report MDF Training & Consultancy 3 Executive Summary Introduction The NRO Food Security Programme covers both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank and builds upon results achieved in the past. In the Multi-annual Strategic Plan for 2014-2017, the NRO has defined the following strategic goal, outcomes and outputs for food security in the oPT states: “At a strategic level, the NRO wishes to contribute to a situation in which the Palestinian people within the Palestinian Territories have access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food, while Palestinian farmers, including smallholders, have the capacity to compete with their products in the national and international markets.” Under the heading of this strategic goal the NRO has funded four projects that together form the Food Security Programme. This mid-term evaluation according to its Terms of Reference seeks to: Improve implementation of the programme during the second part of implementation. Generate knowledge, identifying best practices and lessons learned that could be transferred to other programmes. Methodology The Mid-Term Review was performed by MDF Training & Consultancy by a team of three national and one international consultant. Fieldwork was carried out from May 6 through May 20th 2015 in 6 locations in the West Bank and three in Gaza. At these locations focus group discussions took place with farmers, cooperatives, and women's associations, interviews were held with field staff and local authorities, and project sites were visited. All interviews, focus group discussions and site visits were registered, to enable the comparison of data during the phase of analysis. Findings have been triangulated and compared by the four members of the review mission Relevance The programme as a whole is coherent, with four elements that complement and mutually reinforce each other. It builds upon previous experience, while aligning with relevant policies and addressing weaknesses of the previous phase. Theoretically the link between the programme and the objective of increasing food security is there, but, due to the type of beneficiaries and the choice of high value crops, in the practice of project implementation the relation is not always clear. As a result, the projects respond more to a livelihood strengthening objective than the aim to improve food security. The programme has a strong technical focus; a clear stakeholder oriented approach might have been conducive to more holistic and sustainable strategies. It would also have helped to describe the theory of how change will happen, which brings more focus in the overall strategies. Insufficient strategic analysis seems to have been made of the highly negative impacts of the Israeli “matrix of control” over the Palestine Territories, and the best way to strengthen the rural economies in Gaza and the West Bank. The cross-cutting objective of gender mainstreaming needs more systematic attention and more substantial funding. The programme works in close collaboration with national stakeholders. The choice of the High Value Crops (HVC) project to work with small or medium-sized (in average 70 members) farmer cooperatives may not be the most beneficial in terms of leverage and will require substantial NRO Mid Term Review Food Security Programme Draft Report MDF Training & Consultancy 4 investments to sufficiently build their capacities. More efforts need to be made to increase the bargaining power of farmers with private sector/traders and government authorities. This could be done by strengthening the national cooperative movements, or unions, to break the cycle of marginalization and weakening of these movements by NGOs. All projects have logical frameworks and indicators linked to the various result levels. On the whole, indicators related to straightforward technical interventions tend to be well formulated and measurable. Outcome indicators are more problematic and have so far not been informed; this means that progress towards projected outcomes is not being tracked. Management indicators are missing which makes it difficult to structurally track project expenditure and management mechanisms. All in all, there is important room for improvement in indicator formulation, the development of data collection instruments and in particular the actual monitoring and documentation of the project results, both by the NRO and the implementing agencies, supported by a regular external review process. Effectiveness Programme beneficiaries tend to be male middle income farmers (although the Gaza beneficiary incomes are lower than the West Bank incomes). The needy families targeted in Um An Nasser by the Gaza Buffer Zone Project may to a certain extent not be the final beneficiaries, as evidence suggests that the land is massively being rented to other farmers against minimal prices. While most programme beneficiaries derive their main income from farming, this does not seem to be the case for a group of Qalqilia beneficiaries (HVC) and an estimated 40% of the L&WRM Halhoul beneficiaries. It is not clear which target groups did not get to benefit from the programme. The poorest farmers, who are most in need of a food security programme, have not been reached. Delays and unforeseen expenses were caused by the political situation (notably stop work orders and confiscations, and the 2014 Gaza war) and the 2013 winter storm. The difficulty of travel and communication between Gaza and the West Bank is another cause for delays, as is the building of partnerships with national government. The Gaza Buffer Zone project has been more or less successful in achieving its objectives. 85% of the targeted land was reclaimed and is being cultivated, but not necessarily by the target group; two weeks of capacity building was short to turn Bedouins into farmers. The field coaching that was part of the project has not been provided. The Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards (SPS) project is well underway, be it that the creation of partnerships took more time than foreseen. The project is likely to succeed in making a good start with the SPS capacity strengthening, but for truly improved service delivery efforts beyond the (technical and financial) scope of this project are needed. The HVC project has so far been very successful at building the farmers' capacities in good farming practices and Global GAP certification. Challenges are the farmer dependency on input subsidies and the economic feasibility of the high value crops. The focus on export crops adds to the economic vulnerability of the enterprises. The marketing component needs further strengthening and may not be entirely successful, due to the lack of dynamism and leverage of the farmers' associations. The environmental situation in Gaza is very challenging and requires a certain level of rethinking of strategies. The gender component ought to be better integrated in the main interventions, and the quality of delivery improved. To what extent the project will achieve its outcome is hard to predict at this point; the informing of its outcome indicators might provide a better sense of that. NRO Mid Term Review Food Security Programme Draft Report MDF Training & Consultancy 5 The strength of the (Land & Water Resource Management) L&WRM project is the facilitation of autonomous agricultural development through the provision of adequate infrastructure. This is done in collaboration with local stakeholders and generates a lot of enthusiasm. In terms of contribution to food security it is likely to be more successful in areas that produce foodstuffs for the domestic market than areas where the beneficiaries derive their main income from other sources, and certain families benefitted more than others. While the secondary purpose of preserving Palestinian land rights was well served in that area, the question is whether this use of funds for heavy land reclamation is more beneficial than light land reclamation, which would enable the re-use of agricultural land for less cost and thus more beneficiaries1. The holistic community based approach which is doing well in certain areas, is less successful in others. To effectively strengthen self-reliance, resilience and empowerment of the local community It would benefit from further articulation in concept and in practice. The NRO actively supports the programme through diplomacy and problem solving, but its options are limited in the face of Israeli politics